By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
richardhutnik on 28 April 2012
Edit Thread
badgenome said:
richardhutnik said:

It is, at best, a token effort to throw support at it.  It isn't in the same league as what Rove did to push to organize evangelical churches to support GW Bush's reelection efforts.  It is just words, not a strategic targeting, like Rick Perry saying the GOP is the party of life, in response to an angry mob at a GOP debate.  You do have defaults, like black churches, but the evangelical wasn't really targeted in a meaningful way.  Reminded of a bit of politics that John Kerry did by dropping the Dick Cheney's daugher is a lesbian in a debate.  Just marginal stuff done in passing to say they tried.

That's rather arrogant of you. To be very frank, I probably know a lot more about Marvin Olasky than you do. Also, it was Edwards, not Kerry, who debated Dick Cheney. (VP candidates debate each other, wot.)

Again, you're just defining it down to your liking (black churches don't count for some reason, neither does the Catholic left nor very liberal churches like Episcopalians) and then accusing Democrats of being insincere in their religious pitches. I suppose if you only count the angry frothing mob (real or imagined) of Southern Baptists or those weird Mormons with their funny magic underwear, then yes, I guess Republicans do have something approaching a monopoly on bringing religion into politics. But that has precious little to do with reality.

I am glad you know who Olasky is, so you know why he was mentioned, and why he would have issues with Rand.  

In regards to Kerry, he did use reference to Cheney's daughter in the debate in the 2004 election:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-10-14-lynne-cheney_x.htm

He did also make a play with that for evangelicals, and with a few other statements.  It didn't work.

 

In regards to religion, and I spoke about EVANGELICALS, the GOP has played to them, and made them part of their base.  I had first said that the GOP attempts to wrap itself in Jesus, in response to someone saying that the GOP economic policies had nothing to do with Jesus.  Then I spoke of the GOP party actively targeting Evangelicals, which they do.   You saw a chunk of this under GW Bush who did do a push for faith-based initiatives while he was in office.

There is a reality of a fault line in GOP support between Libertarian free market individuals, who side with Rand, and the socially conservative evangelical base, which has issues with Rand.  That is the main focus of the discussion here.  If you want to argue over it, you are splitting nits and missing the main point I discuss.

In regards to sincerity, I don't hold politicians to be sincere about much of anything, and do just about anything to get sufficient votes to get elected.